The New Year's Honours List 2016 includes Dr Sharon Webb of the Kilmartin Museum for her services to heritage and archaeology in Scotland. I would like to add my congratulations to Sharon and the Kilmartin team.

Wednesday, December 30, 2015

The Roman fort at Bradwell on Essex formed part of the Saxon Shore series of fortifications stretching from Portchester in Hampshire to Brancaster in Norfolk. The site of Bradwell is stunning with its views over the Essex salt marsh. A Saxon chapel was built over the fort's west gate and includes reused Roman material.

People in this country love their heritage. If someone came along and started removing the stones from Stonehenge, there would be outrage. When a Saxon necklace is taken out of the ground illegally it is the same thing. You are changing the story of the landscape.

This deliberate damage to archaeological sites will continue until a clear message is delivered that such actions are unacceptable.

Readers of LM will have noticed that I have been blogging less on cultural property issues (though broader heritage issues are discussed on "Heritage Futures" written with my colleague Professor Ian Baxter). I started the year with a number of predictions, some of which appear appear below.

United Kingdom
It is a year since a major Anglo-Saxon hoard was unearthed at Lenborough. During the year there has been much debate about the use of metal-detectors on undisturbed archaeological sites. There is a need to revisit the issues raised by a forum piece for the Institute of Archaeology.

The Michael C. Carlos Museum at Emory University continues to retain objects derived from Greece that have been identified from the Becchina dossier. The same is also true for the Archaeological Material in Madrid where material from Italy has been identified. Other items in a UK museum have been linked.

An important study of coins on the market was published by Nathan Elkins.

The Antiquities Market
Concerns about the antiquities market continue to be raised. This includes glass from Egypt turning up in London. Christie's has again had to withdraw objects from sales in April, October and December. Wider issues about the due diligence process have been raised. The overall value of sales of antiquities in New York appears to be diminishing.

The 2,000 objects seized in Turkey compare with 6,500 recovered by Syrian authorities from smugglers, 300 seized by Jordanian authorities and 90 returned to Syria from Lebanon since the beginning of the war, according to Abdulkarim.

Earlier in the year BBC reporter Simon Cox reported on some of the material that had been seized in Lebanon ("Are looted antiquities from Syria funding IS?", BBC News February 18, 2015). These reported seizures are likely to be the tip of the iceberg. Where is the other material that has not been intercepted?

Tuesday, December 22, 2015

Displaying the Lenborough Hoard at the British MuseumPhoto: David Gill

Just one year ago the Lenborough Hoard was removed from a Buckinghamshire by less than scientific means. An appeal is now underway to raise money to buy the coins for the Buckingham County Museum: it has raised £12,000 ("Lenborough Anglo Saxon coin hoard pledges reach £12,000", BBC News 19 December 2015).

The money raised is hoped to persuade "funding bodies" to meet the balance, perhaps in the region of just under £1.3 million.

The account of the find raises several issues about the holding of "rallies" on sites that appear on the Historic Environment Record.

For further details see my: "Damaging the Archaeological Record: the Lenborough Hoard", Journal of Art Crime 13 (2015) 51-57 [academia.edu].

Monday, December 21, 2015

In 1955 Lord Harlech described the hill fort at Old Oswestry as 'perhaps the most elaborate in the country'. The English Heritage Heritage Unlocked book on the Midlands describes its earthworks as 'among the most impressive of any British hill fort'.

Wednesday, December 9, 2015

The two major sales of ancient art at Christie's and Sotheby's took place in New York this week. The four sales of ancient art throughout the year raised some $26 million, half a million dollars down on 2014. Once again Sotheby's sales raised more than Christie's: $15.3 million against $10.9 million. This is the fourth year in succession where Sotheby's has been ahead. Sotheby's sold slightly more than in 2014, whereas Christie's were significantly down (at 2008 levels).

We should also note the move to the title 'Ancient Egyptian Sculpture and Works of Art' at Sotheby's for the December sale.

Lot 101, the Canaanatie bronze figure, remains in the sale even though it appears in the Symes Michaelides archive. Did Mathias Komor acquire this directly from Symes? What is the full collecting history of the figure? Did Christie's know that it had been handled by Symes but had chosen not to declare this part of the collecting history in case it raised concerns with potential buyers?

The antiquities team at Christie's would do well to reflect on the implications of overlooking such collecting histories.

Monday, December 7, 2015

Two further antiquities due to be auctioned at Christie's New York on December 9, 2015 have been identified by Glasgow University researcher, Dr Christos Tsirogiannis.

Lot 45. Celtic bronze dagger and scabbard. Estimate: $10,000-$15,000. 'From a Texas Private Collection'. Collection history: 'with Robert Haber, New York.
Acquired by the current owner from the above, 1986'. Images of the dagger appear in the Becchina archive where they are listed as 'Villanovan'.

Christie's New York have withdrawn a Canosan terracotta figure of Zeus and Ganymede from their December 9, 2015 sale (lot 36). It comes from 'an Important American Collection'. The reported collecting history is as follows:

with Boris Mussienko, Upper Marlboro, Maryland.

William Froelich, New York, acquired from the above, 1981.

with Fortuna Fine Arts, New York, acquired from the above, 1995.

with Safani Gallery, New York.
Acquired by the current owner from the above, 1999.

Yet there is documentation in the Becchina archive suggesting that this was in his possession in January 1995. Why is this part of the collecting history absent from the above list? Does Becchina sit between Froelich and Fortuna Fine Arts? What is the authenticated documentation that this figure was in the possession of Mussienko and Froelich?

Will Christie's be stating why this lot was withdrawn?

I am grateful to Glasgow University researcher, Dr Christos Tsirogiannis, for this information.

Saturday, November 28, 2015

The site of Woodhenge in Wiltshire was discovered in the 1920s through aerial observation and it was excavated in 1928. It was placed in state guardianship and metal plaques erected by the Ministry of Works to interpret the site for visitors.

The sad theft of these historic plaques has deprived us of an important aspect of the story of Woodhenge.

They represent a key part of one of the earliest attempts to interpret and present to the public the complex and internationally-significant prehistoric monuments of the Stonehenge World Heritage Site.

We very much hope that the plaques can be recovered and restored to their rightful place at Woodhenge.

Friday, November 13, 2015

One of the lessons from the so-called Medici Conspiracy --- but also the Schinousa and the Becchina archives --- is that recently surfaced archaeological material has passed through well-known dealers and auction houses in Europe (including London) and North America. It is also clear that these same objects were acquired by major public museums as well as by a number of private collectors.

Yet at the time of acquisition there does not seem to have been documented and authenticated evidence that the objects had been circulating in the period before the 1970 UNESCO Convention. Oral histories and incomplete paperwork seem to have been acceptable (and can now be shown in some cases to have been falsified).

The fact that this same material continues to surface on the market at very regular intervals suggests that some auction houses and dealers do not appear to be taking the matter seriously. They should as the resulting negative publicity can unsettle potential buyers. After all, who would want to spend serious money on an object that may have to be returned (without compensation) to (say) Italy.

There are continuing concerns about the potential for material derived from some of Rome's eastern provinces to be surfacing on the market at the present time. To what extent have the due diligence processes been tightened? What safeguards have been put in place to ensure that the paperwork was been checked?

The due diligence process for antiquities needs to be sufficiently rigorous to prevent so-called illicit material from entering the market.

Thursday, October 1, 2015

Christie's has withdrawn the four lots highlighted on LM from its sale of antiquities in London day. They could have been expected to fetch some £50,000 but will now have lost most, if not all, of their value.

It is unclear if the vendor or vendors will be returning the pieces to Italy.

This case once again highlights the weaknesses in Christie's due diligence process. This issue is of particular concern given the reassurances that are being given over the ability to identify surfacing antiquities derived from Syria.

Tuesday, September 29, 2015

Glasgow University researcher Dr Christos Tsirogiannis has identified four items that are due to be auctioned at Christie's King Street (London) on 1 October 2015. I understand that Interpol, the Carabinieri Art Squad and Scotland Yard Art and Antiques Unit have been notified.

Three of the lots come from the Heissmeyer Collection (lots 1-34).

The Heissmeyer collection brings together vases and figural vessels of Greek antiquity from Athens to South Italy, dating from the 8th-4th century B.C. Professor Heissmeyer assembled his collection in affection for the craftsmanship of the ancient potter and painter, considering the vases his 'guests', and as such 'able to move on and delight others'. Prof. Heissmeyer published his collection in two volumes: Vasen und figürliche Gefässe aus der griechischen Antike. Katalog einer süddeutschen Sammlung, Dettelbach, 2008 and Vases and Figure-Shaped Vessels of Greek Antiquity: Catalogue of a Collection in South Germany, Schwäbisch Hall, 2015 (referred to below as 'Vasen, 2008' and 'Vases, 2015').

Publication: Vasen, 2008, no. 19 and Vases, 2015, p. 67, no. 21.
Although a number for the Beazley Archive is provided (9024860) this does not appear to refer to a specific item.
Tsirogiannis notes that a Polaroid photograph that appears to show this oinochoe features in the Becchina archive. A note shows that it was sent for restoration on 1 December 1989 to Sandro Cimicchi.

Publication: Vasen, 2008, no. 3 and Vases, 2015, p. 15, no. 5.
Although a number for the Beazley Archive is provided (9024849) this does not appear to refer to a specific item.
Tsirogiannis notes that the cup appear to feature in the Becchina archive. A note suggests that this was one of four cups purchased by Raffaele Monticelli on 4 March 1993. Becchina's Polaroid is marked that it was sold to 'Hae[ring]'.

Although a number for the Beazley Archive is provided (21590) this does not appear to refer to a specific item.
Publication: J. H. Oakley, The Achilles Painter, Mainz, 1997, pl. 181C.
Vasen, 2008, no. 9 and Vases, 2015, p. 31, no. 10.
Tsirogiannis notes that the lekythos appears in the Becchina archive. A note suggests that the transaction took place in November 1978.

Tsirogiannis notes that this lot was confiscated in the Geneva Freeport by the Swiss authorities from Noriyoshi Horiuchi in 2008 (see Operation Andromeda). He also notes that the lekythos has been offered for sale by Phoenix Ancient Art (website) and subsequently sold. [It also features on pinterest.] It is not clear why Christie's have not provided the full collecting history for the lekythos.

It appears that Christie's has not conducted a sufficiently rigorous due diligence process to identify material from the Becchina archive. Will the auction house be withdrawing the lots prior to the sale?

I am grateful to Dr Tsirogiannis for sharing his identifications with me.

Back in September 2008 the Michael C. Carlos Museum spoke about the importance of a "credible provenance" or "history of ownership" in a press statement responding to Greek claims for three items in the museum.

As far as I can see the museum has never presented the authenticated collecting history (sometimes obsoletely termed the "provenance") for the Minoan larnax in its collection.

I have read the documentation on this piece and the photographic evidence from the Becchina archive is compelling.

I am also aware that the positive identification was made by Dr Christos Tsirogiannis.

We know that the "credible" collecting history for this larnax places it in the hands of Gianfranco Becchina. Why has it taken the Michael C. Carlos Museum seven years to ignore this "credible" evidence?

Saturday, August 29, 2015

I am much enjoying Adam Nicolson's The Mighty Dead: Why Homer Matters (London: William Collins, 2014). I love the weaving of the literary landscapes and the application of Homer's works to contemporary society. And I am about to move from "Grasping Homer" to "Loving Homer".

The book has a series of "Homeric" (broadly speaking!) colour images: a gold mask from the shaft graves at Mycenae; inlaid Myceanean daggers; representations of the Homeric narratives on Athenian black- and red-figured pottery; a writing tablet from the Ulu Burun shipwreck; the walls of Tiryns; the "Homeric" cup from Ischia; an Egyptian ivory cosmetic container; the Kypselid gold phiale from Olympia.

And I wait to see how this diverse group of objects are woven into Nicolson's narrative.

But I am not writing a review. Readers of LM can always get a copy of the book for themselves. [Amazon.co.uk | Amazon.com]

So why am I writing about this book?

One of the colour plates shows "A Cretan bath from the mid-fourteenth century BC, one of the elements of Mediterranean civilisation most greedily adopted by Homeric Greeks".

But wait. Is this the Minoan larnax that was acquired in 2002? Is this the Minoan larnax that appears in the Becchina photographic archive? Is this the Minoan larnax that the Greek authorities asked the Michael C. Carlos Museum to return back in 2007? Is this the larnax that was featured on LM back in 2008? (And see the museum's press release issued back in 2008.)

Nicolson's book is a good reminder of why the museum staff at Emory University need to be contacting the Greek authorities as a matter of urgency. This case needs to be resolved not ignored. (See also the professional responsibilities for the museum.)

And of course the fish on the cover of the book (and elsewhere in the volume) rather evoke the fish on the Minoan larnax. So every time that I pick up this book I will be reminded of the larnax. And if readers of LM take up my suggestion, they too will be reminded of the larnax.

Ursula Kampmann has written about the continuing case of Gianfranco Becchina ("The Becchina case – or: a footnote to practical aspects of the return of cultural property", Coins Weekly August 27, 2015 [note that the article has been translated]). She notes that some 1278 objects were left without certain "provenance" --- what is clearly meant (and this is why I do wish that those writing about the market would differentiate between "collecting history" and "findspot") is that it was not possible to ascertain where those 1278 objects had been found. (And just to clarify, I suspect that the seized paperwork will provide some of the information about the "collecting history".)

Kampmann informs her readership that the 1278 objects could be returned to Palladion Antike Kunst for sale. But who would want to buy these objects? Could Greece, Turkey and who knows which other countries bring a claim once the objects have been matched to the paperwork? Buyers would be wise to be very cautious.

But it appears that 40,000 francs are outstanding as part of a court case and this has led to the confiscation of the 1278 objects. (And one can only think that if these items are unsellable, they are also likely to be valueless.)

Kampmann bewails the "incompetence of the authorities". But actually it highlights the network of deals and dealings surrounding this Swiss-based dealer.

Of course those who were buying directly from Becchina will now be very concerned that their actions will be revealed.

Friday, August 28, 2015

The BBC has circulated images of the destruction of the temple of Baal Shamin at Palmyra (Jonathan Amos, 'Palmyra: Satellite image of IS destruction', BBC News August 28, 2015). The satellite shots were taken on 25 August 2015 - and there is a comparison shot of 22 May.

The Google Earth image was taken in February 2014, and the temple of Baal Shamin can be seen at the top of the picture.

It is being widely reported that the temple of Baal Shamin at Palmyra has been deliberately destroyed. The temple featured in Robert Wood's Temples of Palmyra, otherwise Tadmor, in the desert (London 1753). The ruins had been observed in 1751 (with James Dawkins).

The temple carries an inscription, dated to AD 130/31, in the wake of the visit of the emperor Hadrian to the city. The temple was initiated by Malé son of Yarhai.

Parts of the sanctuary are dated epigraphically to AD 23.

I was asked to comment for the BBC with live interviews this morning for BBC 24 and BBC World, and prerecorded interviews for BBC World Service and BBC1.

... today, for the first time, she is talking openly about the way she and her museum-world colleagues operated. Yes, she did recommend the Getty acquire works she knew had to have been looted. That statement, though, comes with a qualifier:

If she found out where a work had been dug up from, she pushed for its return. In contrast, many of her colleagues did little, if anything, to research a work’s source. None of them were put on trial.

She described her position on recently surfaced material:

“The art is on the market,” True said, describing the Getty’s collecting approach. “We don’t know where it comes from. And until we know where it comes from, it’s better off in a museum collection. And when we know where it comes from, we will give it back.”

I have commented on Marion True's position on a new ethical position before and raised issues about some of the material that was acquired during her curatorship.

I have been reflecting on some of the objects returned to Italy in May 2015. One of the objects in the press photograph was a Peucetian clay stamnos that I had noted before, The Italian press release described it as follows:

The identification had been made by Glasgow University researcher Dr Christos Tsirogiannis when it surfaced at Christie's New York in December 2011 (lot 154). As I noted at the time, the stamnos surfaced through Sotheby's New York in 1995.

It would be interesting to learn who consigned the piece to Sotheby's. Are there related pieces from the same source?

Note that it has taken 20 years for the partial collecting history to emerge. Will that be the same for material coming out of the present conflicts in the Middle East?

FEEDJIT Recommended Reading

Feedback

Some Recommended Books

About Me

David Gill is Professor of Archaeological Heritage and Director of Heritage Futures at the University of Suffolk. He was a Rome Scholar at the British School at Rome and a Sir James Knott Fellow at the University of Newcastle upon Tyne. He was subsequently part of the Department of Antiquities at the Fitzwilliam Museum, University of Cambridge, and Reader in Mediterranean Archaeology, Swansea University. He holds the Archaeological Institute of America's Outstanding Public Service Award (2012).